click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121121
20121121
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)
, they lose. who is thinking about the children when it comes to these issues? recently, in boston, they reached their agreement and they have been fighting for the past two years and their contract that they just agreed to in boston is very similar to what is on the table in chicago. boston has a no-strike clause. they got a mediator from austin d.c. to work with these folks. they settled this thing. at the end of the day, no kids lost time out of the classroom. we are at the point now where we need to evaluate the educational proposals based on one simple yardstick paraquat will this help a child learn? shouldthe answer is yes, we be for, if the answer is no, we should be against. solutions like accountability and quality teachers, one of the solutions is also apparent choice. i have seen that go run the country that the more parents step up and speak out and pressure the system to change, the more they have to respond. the fallacy is that we expect that bureaucracies will reform themselves from within. i do not know about you, but, in my experience, i do not know any example of
married in boston, cannot file a joint tax return. they cannot get benefits under social security for their spouse like another merit couple would. a series of lawsuits have been filed a federal appeals court in boston and new york ruled tartabull law is unconstitutional. it denies gays and lesbians equal protection under the law. they are legally married. the court said they deserve the same legal rights. the obama administration would not defend that law. the house republicans appointed john clement. many of those cases are under appeal and they will surely decide one of those cases this spring host: is there one more likely than the other? guest: that is an inside baseball question. the problem that arose is that elena kagan was the solicitor general when some of those cases were beginning and she mentioned at her confirmation hearings that she had participated in discussions about one of the cases. i think what the court wants to try to do is find a case where she came later and had no involvement. you want nine justices. they don't want age. you could get a split in the would
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)